Barnabas and Reverend Trask...

[MagnusTrask]

I'm inbetween on that.    Sometimes I like RD characters, sometimes I don't.    RD is good at going crazy.    (Dirk, Tate)

[arashi]

On my behalf, and I hope for others, I think it's more like good natured ribbing. A lot of it has to do with his behavior at Fests and the like.

[Miss_Winthrop]

I'm on this board a month or so and I've noticed a recurring hostility to Roger Davis and/or his characters. I was wondering why.

It seems that most boards have one or two characters that get a lot of negative attention from the posters. On this board, the girl who took over for Alexander Moltke, Betsy Durkin, is really skewered most of the time. Human nature being what it is can use the anonymity of posting to really let loose with a lot of hostility.  People become heavily vested in a character which I think is the reason for it IMO.  If you ever go to the Dallas chat room, within 10 minutes, you'll see what I mean.

[Garth Blackwood]

This will contain SPOILERS so anyone watching the show for the first time, avoid this thread.....



When Trask's ghost comes back in 1968 and bricks up Barnabas for revenge for Barnabas bricking him up back in 1795, do you think he was justified?

You all know how I feel about Trask, but being bricked up alive is a pretty horrible, nasty way to die....

I thought this was totally out of character for Trask. As Jerry Lacy pointed out in an interview ones, the original (1795) Trask did seem to honestly believe what he was saying, and had a genuine drive to do good, despite being a fanatic. The other Trasks had little or no qualms about committing murder (Lamar tried to kill Barnabas, Gregory had all sorts of ethical problems). The original Trask (anyone know his first name???) seemed to be bound by ethics, so I really don't understand the "eye for an eye" mentality his ghost employed.

[IluvBarnabas]

I thought this was totally out of character for Trask. As Jerry Lacy pointed out in an interview ones, the original (1795) Trask did seem to honestly believe what he was saying, and had a genuine drive to do good, despite being a fanatic. The other Trasks had little or no qualms about committing murder (Lamar tried to kill Barnabas, Gregory had all sorts of ethical problems). The original Trask (anyone know his first name???) seemed to be bound by ethics, so I really don't understand the "eye for an eye" mentality his ghost employed.

None of the Trasks had any ethics at all, including the Reverend Trask of 1795. He proved that when

SPOILER ALERT:

He blackmailed Nathan into committing perjury and testify against Vicki at her witchcraft trial. I hardly think a man with good morals and ethics would stoop to that, even if he did think he was in the right. 



Trask may very well have believed in what he was doing, but that doesn't justify blackmail and submitting perjury. If he truly was a man of God like he claimed he was, he would have realized that the Almighty looks down on lying and cheating.


I don't think it his revenge against Barnabas was out of character at all. The Bible does say whoever sheds the blood of man, so shall the blood of that man be shed. Trask, being the religious fanatic that he is even in death, probably chose to follow that very passage to justify what he was doing.

[Garth Blackwood]

None of the Trasks had any ethics at all, including the Reverend Trask of 1795. He proved that when

SPOILER ALERT:

He blackmailed Nathan into committing perjury and testify against Vicki at her witchcraft trial. I hardly think a man with good morals and ethics would stoop to that, even if he did think he was in the right. 



Trask may very well have believed in what he was doing, but that doesn't justify blackmail and submitting perjury. If he truly was a man of God like he claimed he was, he would have realized that the Almighty looks down on lying and cheating.


I don't think it his revenge against Barnabas was out of character at all. The Bible does say whoever sheds the blood of man, so shall the blood of that man be shed. Trask, being the religious fanatic that he is even in death, probably chose to follow that very passage to justify what he was doing.

Your point is well taken about 1795 Trask's blackmail incident, although I think he could justify this by claiming that he was doing everything he could to bring to justice someone he honestly believed was a witch. Even in his death he appeared benevolent, in his own annoying evangelical way (by attempting to hunt down and destroy Angelique after he learned the truth). OK, maybe calling him benevolent is a bit of a stretch, but other than the minor trangression of "cheating" in order to condemn a witch (or so he thought), the behavior of his character as a human did not make him out to be a potentially vengeful and murderous person.

[IluvBarnabas]

I think being buried alive behind a brick wall would be enough to make anyone vengeful after death, even a religious fanatic such as Trask. Like I said, he probably used the whoever kills another man should be put to death to theory when he bricked Barnabas up.


I don't doubt Trask, while alive, would definitely have defended his actions to get Vicki convicted and hung as "the good of God," but it still doesn't make it right.

I don't think Vicki was the first girl he persecuted either. I wonder how many other innocent girls he sent to their doom all in the name of doing the work of God.

[Garth Blackwood]

I think being buried alive behind a brick wall would be enough to make anyone vengeful after death

Alright, I definately have to buy that justification. I still don't believe the human Trask gave us evidence that he could be that cold-blooded, but his ghost could be, given the particularly heinous circumstances surrounding his death.

[IluvBarnabas]

I will say this for the 1795 Trask....he was nowhere near as bad as his descendent Gregory.

[Garth Blackwood]

Gregory was pure evil, it's shocking that he evil could pretend to me a reverand. I mean, the guy was a greedy multiple murdering blackmailer!! LOL!! He's on a whole nother level from Lamar and his father (although I would argue Lamar is worse because he actually attempted to murder Barnabas based on the slender evidence that he killed his father)

[IluvBarnabas]

I have to give credit where credit is due.

SPOILER ALERT:

Reverend Trask redeemed himself somewhat by going after the real witch Angelique/Cassandra and exorcised her once he got his revenge against Barnabas out of his system. Too bad though, that Nicholas Blair turned up to undo Trask's exorcism.

[MagnusTrask]

Greg wasn't "pure evil" since that's something that's true only of supernatural creatures.   

I think the only difference between Gregory and the others was the level of personal, financial greed.   They were all equally hypocritical.   Believing you're doing good ... that's a key component of the hypocrisy.    It doesn't necessarily mean ANYTHING.     Everyone in the world tells himself he's doing what's right, including Gregory.    It outraged him that Charity was painting her face.    He spouted off to Even about his moral principles at the same time that he was asking him to help in a murder.    He's crazy enough to tell himself that whatever he does is holy.   

The difference between a liar and a hypocrite is that the hypocrite is also lying to himself.   That makes "meaning well" practically meaningless.

If Trask #1 was so wonderful, he'd take more care when accusing people.    People like that are feeding their own egos.    They need to feel powerful and righteous at other people's expense.   They need to feel superior, even if others are hurt or killed in the process.

[Garth Blackwood]

Magnus--

Gregory could not possibly have thought he was doing the ethically correct thing when murdered that widow, or his wife Minerva. He may have thought he had moral principles, but consciously decided to ignore them from time to time (similarly to how Lamar ignores his when he decides to kill Barnabas). In none of these cases could any "greater good" result.

However, with the original Trask, you cannot say the same. His fault, albeit not necessary a moral one, was that he trusted his instincts too much. Besides, what the heck was he supposed to think when Victoria ran out of the house after the exorcism?? That was the final nail in the coffin regarding his opinion of Vicki, and from there on out he was completely determined to see her hang (which seemed to be a noble cause! If he had done this to Angelique in 1795 we wouldn't be talking about how morally faulty he was)

[MagnusTrask]

Magnus--

Gregory could not possibly have thought he was doing the ethically correct thing when murdered that widow, or his wife Minerva.

Oh yes he could.   It would be impossible for you or me, but not for him.   It's amazing the kinds of total contradictions people can contain in their minds.   That's where the idea for Orwell's "doublethink" began.

Minerva was a trial for him, someone whose constant suspicions were making it hard for him to have the serenity to do his work for the Lord properly and well.

There is a scene between Evan Hanley and G Trask, with ONLY the two of them in the room... and it's a conversation in which Trask has just blackmailed Hanley into agreeing to help Trask murder Minerva.   Trask continues to speak as a "man of God", spouting righteous ideas and morals, even in the middle of this conversation.    Remember, he's not talking to anyone except the man he's just arranged a murder with, so he doesn't need to lie to impress Evan with his "goodness"... therefore, Trask must really believe this about himself.

He knows on some very deep-down level it's wrong, but he's a man of God and the usual rules are flexible for special people like him.   Rationalization becomes very easy after you've been practising a few decades.

Trask #1 is a similar hypocrite, lying to himself so that he can "honestly" lie through his teeth to others.    It's about ego and power.   As I said, if there were anything virtuous in him, he'd have some humility and question his own assumptions and actions, and take much more care before accusing anyone.   He also would not enjoy the job so much.    He's about to explode with pride as he accuses and torments and ties governesses to trees, etc..

[Garth Blackwood]

OK Trask I agree to disagree about whether Trask I was as bad as his successors. I just watched the awesome episode where Greg gets walled up-- the final scene with Tim Shaw and Judith laughing in front of the brick wall is pretty sweet.

By the way, earlier in the episode Greg jumped out of the way looking pretty scared when Mr Blackwood walked by